September 17, 2010

"... parents were forced to bury their children alive or were doused in excrement and urine, others were set alight, or had a nose or ear cut off. One record shows how a man was branded with hot metal. People were forced to work naked in the middle of winter; 80 per cent of all the villagers in one region of a quarter of a million Chinese were banned from the official canteen because they were too old or ill to be effective workers, so were deliberately starved to death."

sounds pretty much exactly like what is beginning to happen with Obama in charge. Honestly, these are the kinds of things his administration looks at as for the common good. No amount of misery and suffering, not even on this scale (and it WILL be on this scale in the next decade), would dissuade liberals from their socialist aspirations. Only a grassroots movement promoting fiscal conservatism can bring down this evil regime.

I read accountssuch as this, and am horrified. One of m yHistory professors at Michigan used to say that Stalin and Mao were responsible for millions more people killed than even the Third Reich. Horrible

You know the sick humor in this is say, 20-30 years from now after Fidel is worm food and we start hearing from this kind of stuff from those who lived under his 'utopia' all his apologists will be in full denial mode saying they NEVER cooed over the guy.

Thge Maos of the world use a seductive to human pride ideology called Marxism. Their first method to remake all the world into a Just and Equal place is always the same...find all of the leaders of the existing society and murder them. After that they are left with sociopaths running their Murderocracy. But they must first remove all guns used to defend people from murderous cadres sent to out to hunt down and kill the old leadership.

Truth again proves stranger than fiction. Kozinski's The Painted Bird portrayed European horrors like this. But his book is unusual; fiction writers shy away from stuff like this, I think because depravity taken to such extremes has an unbelievable, reductio-ad-absurdum quality. It almost has to be written first as history before it can find a voice like Solzhenitsyn, Primo Levi or Elie Wiesel to speak for all the lost souls.

"Or, what guides a man such as Mao from basic human goodness to monster?"

A belief in communism (that's lower-case "c" there; and yes I'm looking at you and your despicable wife, Professor "we might need to kill as many as 25 million people" Ayers) and the power to attempt to inflict it on a national scale.

Yes, BUT, Mao had the best of intentions, so all this is just an unfortunate unforeseeable by-product, and we should not hold him, nor especially his ideology, responsible for these little slip-ups. After all, who among us has never made a mistake? I didn't think so.

On the other hand, however pleasant the wealth and freedom of the capitalist regimes is, it is hateful and oppressive, because it is ultimately the product of nothing more than the lowest money-grubbing selfishness. Nobody has ever *truly* contributed to society, who was only thinking about his or her own profit. Could you truly be happy, knowing that your daily transactions centered around myopic self-interest, rather than the enlightened ideals of superior leaders? Of course not, which makes the freedom and prosperity of capitalist societies by far the worst crime against humanity ever committed.

A belief in communism (that's lower-case "c" there; and yes I'm looking at you and your despicable wife, Professor "we might need to kill as many as 25 million people" Ayers) and the power to attempt to inflict it on a national scale.

This is exactly why communism and Hitler's national socialism were pretty much identical ideologies. Hitler wanted a 'perfect race' and that meant eliminating all non-hackers. Communism wanted a 'perfect human race' and that mean killing off all non-hackers. The only real difference between the Nazis and the Communists is the Nazis had spiffier uniforms.

I rented the bottom of a two story house on Portland Ave. in St. Paul, MN back in about 1969 or 70, and one day I noticed the owners kid carrying some boxes into a locked storage room in the basement. After he left I picked the lock and found 3 large cardboard boxes filled with Mao's little red books. I wish I could remember his name. His parents had all kinds of rental properties.

I was recently hanging w/ a girl (22 yo) who has already been to a couple dozen countries including three trips to China. When traveling in China she spends most of her time way out in the country, where riding on buses is her mode of transportation.

Apparently in some rural areas it's a cultural thing for folks (including women) to spit (and smoke) w/o pause at all times.

In addition to the bus situation, she found that some of the colder areas have little frozen spit mounds all over the ground.

In my youth, I foolishly had posters of Mao and Muhammad Ali on my bedroom wall. As I matured and read, I realized my mistake. The abuses of Mao have been known for a long time. It is just in the last few years did I learn of the way Ali treated Joe Frazier, a man who helped Ali when he was down. We live and learn. At least some of us do.

I wonder how he could justify this, and I wonder how people implementing the plan could as well

You need to find out more about a man called George Soros, and how he had collaborated with the Nazis. How a man could act that way, is to find out how people can act that way. Soros easily justified his actions, because if he didn't do it, somebody else would have.

Oh my God! I just remembered Obama is a dedicated Marxist. This election is about who will be ruling when the Murder Cadres finish off the old leaders like me. The Preident's Administration is now one big Death Panel. George Washington would not be pleased.

Off topic, but has anyone taken a look at the Drudge pics today? It's all about hand gestures: Palin and Pelosi pointing, Michelle pushing away with her palm, some Euro-dude pushing away against Sarkozy about the Roma, Vlad Putin with clenched fists.

Robert Conquest discusses the problem of socialism and planned economies in The Dragons of Expectation: Reality and Delusion in the Course of History. ""Even the ostensibly nonphysical methods used in 1936 are described by victims as both mentally and physically devastating. One man arrested briefly told me that the comparatively mild-sounding stoika, when a prisoner was kept standing against a wall for days, was hardly bearable. Torture is, one might say, a worse crime against humanity than killing..."

Inevitably, socialism leads to this kind of horror. There is no third way. Eventually, coercion must be used. First it is soft. Then it is violent. That is why people who read about these things, all the way back to Whittaker Chambers fear socialists like Obama. And this because the left long denied these murders, and colluded to deny them (Duranty at the NYTimes).

Because they want this revolution in the US still (e.g. Obama's friend Bill Ayers).

"Oh my God! I just remembered Obama is a dedicated Marxist. This election is about who will be ruling when the Murder Cadres finish off the old leaders like me. The Preident's Administration is now one big Death Panel. George Washington would not be pleased."

Tom Friedman said...One-party autocracy certainly has its drawbacks. But when it is led by a reasonably enlightened group of people, as China is today, it can also have great advantages. That one party can just impose the politically difficult but critically important policies needed to move a society forward in the 21st century.

wasn't that just an updated version of what the 60's leftists said about Mao and moving China into the 20th century?

Temporarily forced out of business in the United States, they turned to other markets, including the Soviet Union, where Winkler-Koch built 15 cracking units between 1929 and 1932. During this time, Koch came to despise communism and Josef Stalin's regime. In his 1960 book, A Business Man Looks at Communism, Koch wrote that he found the Soviet Union to be "a land of hunger, misery, and terror." According to Charles Koch, "Virtually every engineer he worked with [there] was purged."

"Haven't I told you again and again about the hundreds of thousands of people Christianity has killed in the name of God? Excuse me for sec...

...what? How many tens of millions? Mao? You're kidding. Well, shit. How many does that come to when added to Stalin? Wow. Well, take down the website and burn all the little red books. We're going to have to change tactics...

Now, as I was saying. Christians have been responsible for more deaths in the name of their god than anyone else..."

Anyone old enough to remember all the lefties during the 60's and early 70's with their little red books?

I recall one story of a Red Chinese ping pong player who would lift Quotations over his head before a match to imbue himself "with the power of Mao's thought".

These ideological dictatorships all seem to rely on the cult of the personality (Adolf, Mussolini, Stalin, etc.) to keep going. That's one of the biggest things that has scared people about The Zero.

PS While Stalin is estimated to have been responsible for the deaths of up to 40 million, as opposed to Mao's 66 mil, Uncle Joe was more utilitarian about it. You were either shot, worked to death (for the glory of the State, of course), or allowed to starve. Joe didn't worry about scaring people; if he thought you were a threat (a lot of times even if he didn't), you were dead.

No, this doesn't sound anything like what is "beginning to happen with Obama in charge." No.

I agree with you however, I don't think it helps his (Obama's image) when he appoints people like Van Jones who admits his affinity for communism or Anita Dunn who claims Mao was one of her favorite philosophers.

Everything I have read about Obama (including his own books) doesn't exactly paint a picture of someone who is repelled by communism. Indeed, when you look at his mother, father and those he associated with through his formative years and adult life, you need to go a long way to convince me that he doesn't think that's the way we should be going. But for our system of government, I think he'd go full blown Soviet if allowed.

AllenS:You obviously don't read The New Yorker magazine which just had a lengthy hit piece on the Koch brothers. They are dastardly folks who believe in libertarian ideas and help to fund crazy subversive groups like the Heritage Foundation.

I can hardly bear to read these stories anymore. But the fact that little if any of these mass murders is ever taught or discussed or even admitted as fact in US classrooms makes me go on reading about these terrible crimes.

It's amazing how little Never again actually meant. More like 'Again and again.'

"No, this doesn't sound anything like what is "beginning to happen with Obama in charge." No."

And yet.

In a mere few weeks, the citizens of Delaware will elect a self-declared Marxist to the Senate; a Democrat who believes in the very tenets that fueled the torture and murder of 100 million the 20th century.

The vile talk and mockery is reserved however for his opponent, a little loon who happens to oppose socialism.

Or, what guides a man such as Mao from basic human goodness to monster?

From the recent biography of Mao, it appears that he was a narcissistic sociopath from youth - a "little emperor" run amuck. So the better question is, what social conditions allow monsters like Mao to seize absolute power? As far as I can tell, Mao *wasn't* personally charismatic; his hold over people was definitely after the fact of his supremacy was locally established.

And I can't imagine where you get your superstition about the inherent goodness of men. I'm willing to entertain the notion of an inherently good *man*, a sort of Asimovian "mule" or occasional freak of nature, but all of us? From first principles? Pernicious nonsense! Mankind is born depraved, and under proper circumstances socialized into a condition of decency.

Now, as I was saying. Christians have been responsible for more deaths in the name of their god than anyone else..."

Well, I'm not sure what the purpose is in this game of tallying up victims. Suffice it to say that Christians, or people acting in the name of Christianity, committed awful atrocities against so-called heretics.

But if we must engage in a numbers game, the total victims of Christianity is small compared to that of Communism (or modern totalitarian ideologies). Among other reasons, when Christianity was killing heretics or non-believers, it was using quite simple means to do so.

The truly massive evil of communism (or fascism) is that it was combined with the mechanisms of the modern state. That alone made it possible to kill more and oppress more than, for example, a 12th century Christian army.

Again, we can agree that it's wrong to kill innocents for whatever reason.

But there's a part of the Koch fortune that didn't come from hard work. Depending on who you listen to, they either "mismeasured" thirty million dollars worth of crude oil, or they directed their employees to engage in systematically undermeasuring pump readings.

Peter, I read the first page of that article, but did not read any farther. If he worked for it, good for him. We gave the USSR airplanes and tanks and grain and everything else we could back in the days of WWII.

If you can stand it, the once-secret photographs of the Cultural Revolution in Red-Color News Soldier are worth a view, containing images of the public humiliations and executions of the many many enemies of the Chinese state.

Well, I'm not sure what the purpose is in this game of tallying up victims.

In my own experience within political/theological debate, it's always some know-nothing idiot, usually around college-aged, but not necessarily, that claims something like Christians in particular or religion in general has killed more people than anything else. Always forgetting that the true monsters claimed to be, at the least, hostile toward religion of any kind other than the worship of their own personality.

Well Pogo, Marx did warn us that history occurs twice: the first time as tragedy and the second time as farce. So when the killing ramps up again, at least the brilliant philosophy behind it can assure us we'll find it amusing rather than horrific. So we at least have that going for us.

Well after his performance of explaining how monetary policy works, LOL is about all he's got left. Garage may think he knows something of history but I'm quite sure I've forgotten more than he'll ever know.

In my own experience within political/theological debate, it's always some know-nothing idiot, usually around college-aged, but not necessarily, that claims something like Christians in particular or religion in general has killed more people than anything else

Sorry, I missed the "acting" pose you were using.

We all agree (I would think) that the Crusades and other military actions undertaken under Christianity led to incredible horrors for their victims. Jews especially, of course.

But these were simple armies using simple weapons (spears, swords) that simply didn't have the capability of inflicting the massive death and destruction that modern totalitarian ideologies have had using modern armaments and technology.

I think it was Trotsky who described Stalin as "Genghis Khan with a telephone." Stalin had the ability to order the massacre of thousands and thousand simply by making a phone call.

The truly massive evil of communism (or fascism) is that it was combined with the mechanisms of the modern state. That alone made it possible to kill more and oppress more than, for example, a 12th century Christian army.

Modern state mechanisms doesn't have much to do with mass murder. Rwanda proved that you could slaughter something north of three quarters of a million people in three months using mechanisms not much advanced beyond the 12th century. Stalin and Mao didn't even get that bloody and instead found starvation a pretty effective weapon of mass destruction.

But these were simple armies using simple weapons (spears, swords) that simply didn't have the capability of inflicting the massive death and destruction that modern totalitarian ideologies have had using modern armaments and technology.

SMG, see my example of Rwanda where 800K were murdered in 3 months by militia groups mostly armed with machetes.

Eliminating entire groups of people has never been limited by technology, just the willingness by those wielding the stick.

"...it's always some know-nothing idiot, usually around college-aged, but not necessarily, that claims something like Christians in particular or religion in general has killed more people than anything else."

What's worse is that folks throwing around these absurdly inflated numbers (occasionally greater than the whole population of Europe at the time!) are unwittingly parroting black legends deliberately created by 16th-century princes for political propaganda to stir up hatred against the Church, the only viable check on their power. These atheists are no different than Turks still teaching "The Protocols of the Elders of Zion" as historical fact despite its having been proven a Tsarist forgery.

Some may claim Christianity has killed more people than anything else, but even if you expand that statement to all religions it isn't true. The number one cause of premature death in human history is "government".

That government might be communism, or it might be kings, but the desire to rule over others has been the most destructive force in human history.

You might think about that when evaluating those who'd like you to believe religion is uniquely dangerous.

Well after his performance of explaining how monetary policy works, LOL is about all he's got left. Garage may think he knows something of history but I'm quite sure I've forgotten more than he'll ever know.

Yea sure schooled me yesterday didn't you? Your knowledge of our monetary system is as about as keen as your theory that communism and fascism are, well, pretty much identical ideologies.

I wish I had a link to that clip of Bill Mahar's show where he made his usual remark about religion causing war/killing people and one of his lefties actually smacked him down rather casually "Relgions don't cause wars Bill, people do." (Or something like that)

Actually garage, I didn't mention fascism as that was the predominant ideology of Mussolini's Italy whereas Hitler embraced national socialism which, while having some fascists principles, was different.

As I said later, both communism and national socialism have significantly more in common than they don't. Now I know such concepts is foreign to someone who thinks we can't run out of money because the government has a magic money machine so I'll work on a coloring book with connect the dots for you over the weekend.

You were schooled by several people on economics/monetary policy yesterday, but you're too stupid to realize, let alone retain it.

I've come to the conclusion after that debate that garage is the Black Knight in Monty Python. You know, the one who gets his arms and legs chopped off and still thinks he can somehow win the swordfight.

I was recently in China and Mao is still widely revered there. His face is everywhere and even educated Chinese would argue that Mao did more good than bad. They admit that he made some mistakes, but the phrase I heard several times was "Mao was 70 percent good; 30 percent bad".

Are you related to the 10th grade English Teacher who graded my essay on Lord of the Flies?

Not unless you went to school in Ohio in the fifties when my grandmother was still teaching.

Modern state mechanisms doesn't have much to do with mass murder. Rwanda proved that you could slaughter something north of three quarters of a million people in three months using mechanisms not much advanced beyond the 12th century. Stalin and Mao didn't even get that bloody and instead found starvation a pretty effective weapon of mass destruction.

I doubt that's actually true. For one thing, even if the majority of murders were committed by machete, the mobs swinging the blades were directed by radio broadcasts. The "Christian" progroms cited by folks trying to counter anti-Communist arguments were done in spastic bursts, like forest fires in true wilderness. It took exceptional events like the occasional crusade passing by to produce truly awful and intense outbursts, and even those were localized. Modern communications and organization are necessary for true regional-class genocidal outbursts, I think.

garage mahal said... You were schooled by several people on economics/monetary policy yesterday, but you're too stupid to realize, let alone retain it.

You dumb fuckers thought we "print money" when we need to spend on something. Please.

9/17/10 12:42 PM

You do realize this metaphor for policies which increase the money supply is used by just about everyone, right? Is it too much to ask that when saying something that already makes you look foolish you hold the unreasonable nastiness?

No moron, you won't answer questions people ask of you after you bitch about "proper" debate. Don't peddle that bullshit here.

Try actually debating instead of ducking and dodging and you might put some knowledge in that empty head of yours.

I wonder how long it took you to dig up a website with that bit of info you posted since it was the first time you've ever tried to wade into a disuccion on monetary policy and economics. Then when challenged on your half-assed presentation of information, you ****surprise**** shut the fuck up.

For those arguing this communism vs. Christianity question, you leave out the one thing the christians have that communism didn't:

Time.

I'm talking centuries of killing. Of still killing. And then there's all the lives that have been undermined, and people made into outcasts, etc., because they wouldn't/won't go along. Fuck "heretics" - how about just people who want y'all to shut up about it? They get a target on their backs, away from the limelight. All kinds of shit goes down because of this shit. Didn't all this BS over the Koran and the Ground Zero mosque give anyone pause enough to see all that emotion (and some deaths) was all over NOTHING? God didn't appear to defend either "side" - it was just a bunch of cruel idiots getting all fired up over the idea of something that doesn't exist.

I wonder if Garage could tell me where they have been putting my payroll taxes for the last 30 years? I keep hearing about some sort of social security trust fund but I got a feeling that is the ruling class's version of Bigfoot.

"No offense Crack, but are they starving in the American ghetto? Last I checked, obesity is rampant."

Is the horror of what it's like to live where crime is rampant, killing is casual, and education is limited, beyond comprehension - merely because somebody got a Happy Meal?

I'm led to think you guys can't understand any metric but those imposed by the media. Why is obesity such a major issue? Are people falling dead in the streets from eating too much? The last image I saw leaving South central, Los Angeles was a guy in the street with a bullet in his head. That's a problem.

I really don't understand how some of you think. You seem so sheltered, yet feel qualified to be so opinionated on issues you barely have a grasp of. I've seen people - white people - starve to death in my neighborhood. They simply ran out of money and were so afraid of everyone around them (blacks) they didn't say anything. Started eating leaves and dog shit from their lawn - everyone else just thought they were tidying up the whole time.

I swear, you don't understand anything. You're yuppies (of a fashion) demanding the rest listen to you. i don't mean to be condescending here - honestly - but such limited modes of thinking (Obesity?) considering what we're dealing with.

Interesting report, but you really have to wonder what is going on. The Chinese do not gratuitously insult mao or allow others to put him down. He is still officially a national hero and the part is still officially communist. Although I have little doubt as to the truth of this account of the GLF, my question is what is the current regime’s purpose in allowing that truth to be told. There is a purpose to this, besides just of telling the truth for its own sake. And I wonder what that purpose is.

I will add for anyone ever studying Chinese history, it is the goddamnedest subject you will ever learn about. Forget the names that are, well, challenging if you are not raised on those names, and the fact that there are two systems of transliterating from Chinese to English. The other brig problem is everyone lies about Chinese History. First it was the imperial historians who told the same story. The last regime was good when it first came in. Then it became corrupt. So the mandate of heaven shifted to the new regime.

Then later came the white racist historians. Okay it is probably wrong to call them liars, but they weren’t telling the truth either.

Then later came the communist historians who peddled their own lies.

Of course you have outsiders who have been interested in the truth, but all their sources of information is always these liars.

Its too bad, because it is after all the oldest continual civilization in the world and we could have learned a lot about human nature by studying them, if the data hadn’t been so hopelessly corrupted.

AJ Lynch said: "I keep hearing about some sort of social security trust fund but I got a feeling that is the ruling class's version of Bigfoot."

I don't even like to think of the SS trust fund. When you stop and think about what SS is supposed to fund, what's funding SS, and what's funding the thing that's funding SS, you realize just how completely fucked our entire system is.

"Children stealing a potatoe were tied up and dumped into ponds. Cannibalism was practiced, millions literally starved to death, millions more forced into prison labor.

No, that's not taking place in an America ghetto."

No, people getting shot to death - over what music is playing - is. Fathers having their heads beaten in with hammers - because they want to raise their kids right in the face of gangs - is. Their children having their feet smashed with hammers - because they won't go along - is. Girls being gang-raped, regularly, is. And it's happening ALL OVER THE COUNTRY. How many is that in a country of 320 million? I mean, we don't have the population of China, but I'm sure, if you did the figures, it would still be an embarrassment of ghastly proportions.

Crack you're going to play the “victim card”,eh? First let's address your methodology, the fact that none of us has been to Camden, Newark, South Central, or Cabrini Green means little. Have YOU been to a Death Camp? That some how seems to be a part of your argument, that UNLESS I go to a ghetto I can't compare atrocities...well get back to me when you return from Kampuchea, Myanmar, Rwanda, or the White Sea Sip Canal.

Secondly, Stalin and Mao got about at least 10% of their nation's populations, in excess of 100 million people. Now unless you're going to say that some where north of 32 million people have died in ghettos, BECAUSE of the ghetto, sorry you ain't a victim.

Finally, “Victim.” A Kulak or a Ukrainian was a VICTIM, they died because Stalin thought they should. In the ghetto people are making CHOICES, join a gang, don't act white, drop out, have babies out of wedlock, buy/sell drugs. CHOICES, and they suffer the consequences of those choices...My Slavic forebears suffered for having made the “choice” of being born into nations occupied by either Hitler or Stalin, and for having made the choice of being “Jewish..” And by “Jewish” we mean someone who was SAID to be a Jew by the Einsatz Gruppen, whether or no they were Orthodox and Kosher or secular and Socialist...Some choice, eh, in being Jewish.

So NO, US ghettos do NOT equal the work of Stalin, Hitler, or Mao, in scope or cause. Thank you for playing though.

@garage - The ruling class wants you to believe that, because the ruling class wants that money.

"The ruling class"? You've been hanging out with Robert Cook too much. Put down the beret and the Rage Against the Machine CD.

The Social Security trust fund exists as a bookkeeping device only, since its assets are obligations of the US Treasury. The two cancel each other out completely.

This is how the OMB describes it:

These [Trust Fund] balances are available to finance future benefit payments and other Trust Fund expenditures – but only in a bookkeeping sense.... They do not consist of real economic assets that can be drawn down in the future to fund benefits. Instead, they are claims on the Treasury that, when redeemed, will have to be financed by raising taxes, borrowing from the public, or reducing benefits or other expenditures. The existence of large Trust Fund balances, therefore, does not, by itself, have any impact on the Government’s ability to pay benefits. (from FY 2000 Budget, Analytical Perspectives, p. 337)

"Look, I don't doubt that there aren't terrible things going on in our ghettoes. But they're simply not comparable in number or degree to what happened in China during Mao's reign."

Agreed, but it's still a damn outrage - and you'd feel more about it if it was a part of your "normal" upbringing.

SMGalbraith and AW,

Not one of those occurrences I mentioned made the papers, and many weren't reported to anybody - the rapes, especially. Like I said, I don't know how you guys think, or what world you live in. Oh, wait, yes I do - it's the world where the cops are called because Dad got drunk or something. Not the world where society, almost as a whole, isn't trusted - to understand anything - so nobody calls for help but handles things themselves, keeping the cycle going in revenge killings.

There are entire communities, here, where cops don't dare to go - people sitting on their porches with shotguns is a great deterrent. Not too long ago, I was out with a freelance photographer - a guy who shoots for Newsweek and covered Iraq - and somebody stole his equipment from the trunk of his car. This was in Oakland, California. he insisted we drive around and see if we could find the thief/thieves, an idea I thought was useless and, frankly, nuts. So we're driving around and then - oops - made a wrong turn onto the wrong fucking street: it was filled with one of the largest groups of monsters I'd seen in years. Guys with biceps the size of my head - at least 100 of them - just milling around a single block in a residential neighborhood at 2AM.

Needless to say, Mr. I've-been-in-a-war-zone didn't bother inquiring about the location of his zoom lens.

Excuse me? Talk about a media-inspired perspective on what I said! I haven't claimed victim status about anything. I said this is what's happening, here, and Christians are doing it, though no one blames them.

Social security is already bankrupt. The ruling class has been spending the money. To date, the total they Madoffed from us is about $3 Trillion not including the money we could have made in interest income.

Somefeller:Yeah no shit, most of us here stay informed so we know where the term "ruling class" came from and why it has become so popular.

Theodore White portrayed the Nationalists un Chiang as hopelessly corrupt, and the Communists under Mao as pure and visionary. The Communists, of course, won the civil war, and the Nationalists fled to Formosa. It was the opinion of White and other liberals that nothing good would ever happen under Chiang and that the US Navy should not protect him by patrolling the Straits of Formosa.......Jump cut sixty years later: Taiwan is a democracy. The first democracy in China's four thousand year history. The standard of living on Taiwan is at least ten times higher than that of the mainland......I think it is fair to say that White and the liberals didn't understand what Mao was all about and demonized Chiang to an unfair extent......As the liberals detail our dilemna in Afghanistan, it would be wise to take this opportunity to mull upon how often and how deeply they have blown the call. I'm sure Karzai and the Afghan government, like the Shah and his government, like Diem and his government, are every bad thing the liberals write about him. Nonetheless, he is pro western and the opposition are far, far worse.....I got the feeling that White supported the Communists not despite the fact that they were anti-western, but because of that very fact. The secret appeal of the Taliban among liberals is not their religious fervor but their hatred of the west.

Yeah no shit, most of us here stay informed so we know where the term "ruling class" came from and why it has become so popular.

Maguro was implying that Garage's use of the phrase was some sort of lefty agitprop rhetoric. I merely pointed out that the term is used primarily these days by certain sections of the Right, namely the resentful prole sections. But congratulations on being so informed.

Whatever, garage. The point is that the trust fund just keeps track of money that the government owes to itself. It's an accounting tool, that's it. It's as if Cadillac had a big IOU from Chevy.

There's no bank vault full of gold coins sitting there waiting for garage to retire. Your SS check will be funded by the people who are working at that time. Which is how Social Security has always worked.

Garage:It's a ponzi scheme and they tend to have a positive cashflow for a while but sooner or later the money runs out. That is why soc sec is a topic of concern. There is no trust fund - they never installed a lockbox. Got it?

The trust fund are U.S. treasury bonds, over 2.5 trillion worth. They've been accumulating since the 1980s when congress decided to collect more taxes in than needed to pay current benefits - to have reserves for boomers. So no there isn't a "lockbox", but it's silly to claim a trust fund doesn't exist. Surpluses created the trust fund!

I'm trying not to get into the hyperbole here, but when you start to take a look at the whackos Obama appoints/surrounds himself with, it's damn hard not to think these folks are up to some vile things.

garage mahal: "No it isn't. Millions are getting their SS checks every day. Like clockwork. And will continue to pay full promised benefits for decades."

Talk about spin generated talking points. Fuck.

SS paid out more last year than it made (Hence the lack of a COLA, despite the WH spin about that being inflation related), which is why they had to start cashing some securities from the fund. 6 years ahead of projections. The same projections that you buy off on SS being solvent for decades to come.

So what are the securities that make up the fund garage? What can you tell me about them?

(Does that question sound familiar? It should, it's from that list you refuse to answer because you don't know jack shit about this subject, even though Maguro just joined the long list of people schooling you on this)

The trust fund are U.S. treasury bonds, over 2.5 trillion worth. They've been accumulating since the 1980s when congress decided to collect more taxes in than needed to pay current benefits - to have reserves for boomers. So no there isn't a "lockbox", but it's silly to claim a trust fund doesn't exist. Surpluses created the trust fund!

It exists, but it's just a set of IOUs from another government entity - the Treasury. So as far the overall level of spending, borrowing and taxation, it's all a wash.

It exists, but it's just a set of IOUs from another government entity - the Treasury.

Almost all financial transactions involve promises-to-repay which are, in the ultimate sense, “just IOUs.” The money you’ve deposited into your bank is no longer there. Does that mean your bank balance is illusory? Your money is spent! The term IOU is just a clever euphemism to make it sound not legit. Does the Chinese think these Treasury bonds are "just IOUs"? Then why do they keep buying them?

The only way the loans wouldn't get repaid is if the U.S. government went completely tits up, which is virtually impossible. In a slightly more rational world, that would be the end of the story. But we don’t live in that world.

Explain yourself. Be specific. Show your work. Don't be worthless in a debate.

The reference was to Pogo's remark that the US gov could, or is likely go belly up. If we had privatized portion of SS like conservatives wanted us to it would have been handled by people like Lehman Bros. US Treasury, or US Treasury. What's your pick in hindsight?

By law, income to the trust funds must be invested, on a daily basis, in securities guaranteed as to both principal and interest by the Federal government. The securities held by the trust funds are "special issues" of the U.S. Treasury. These securities are available only to the trust funds. The government has always repaid Social Security, with interest, what makes you think this won't continue? You may not like the fact that the government borrows from the trust fund, but that's another discussion entirely.

garage said: "Almost all financial transactions involve promises-to-repay which are, in the ultimate sense, “just IOUs.” The money you’ve deposited into your bank is no longer there. Does that mean your bank balance is illusory? Your money is spent!"

No shit garage. But these IOUs are backed by something aren't they? If I want my money out of a bank, can I go get it even though it's spent? What are they (IOUs) backed by? (This is about the 4th time I've asked you this shit)

"The term IOU is just a clever euphemism to make it sound not legit."

No, it's an acronym and it is an accurate term. Do you know what a bond is garage??? Do you know what backs government securities??? (Again, I've asked you the latter question about 4 times too.)

A bond is a fucking IOU almost by definition. It's not some clever ploy to fuel your paranoid imagination.

"Does the Chinese think these Treasury bonds are "just IOUs"? Then why do they keep buying them?"

garage mahal: "The reference was to Pogo's remark that the US gov could, or is likely go belly up. If we had privatized portion of SS like conservatives wanted us to it would have been handled by people like Lehman Bros. US Treasury, or US Treasury. What's your pick in hindsight?"

I'll answer this just as soon as you answer the question you dodged with this non-answer.

What surpluses??? Talk about not knowing where you get your data. Got a link?

The surpluses are the exact amount of payroll taxes taken in over the amount of benefits paid out. Are you disputing even this? It was set up this way by Reagan and Greenspan.

Whatever SSA collects out of the trust fund comes directly out of Treasury's purse.

The net effect is zero.

Actually the trust fund lends it to the treasury by buying bonds from it, who pays the trust fund back with interest. So if the net effect is zero, what's the prob? The gov would just borrow it from somewhere else...

garage, furiously studying his source to try and get a grasp on a subject he clearly knows little about said:

"By law, income to the trust funds (held for the federal government) must be invested (in the federal government), on a daily basis, in securities guaranteed as to both principal and interest by the Federal government. The securities held by the trust funds (for the federal government) are "special issues" of the U.S. Treasury (part of the federal government). These securities (underwritten by the federal government) are available only to the trust funds (on behalf of the federal government).

"The government has always repaid Social Security, with interest, what makes you think this won't continue?"

Golly, it's always been there, so you're right, what could go wrong. This gets back to your idiotic stance that there is a bottomless pit of money at our disposal.

Your bald-faced stupid argument notwithstanding, look up at the paragraph of yours I modified - can you wrap your mind around how unsustainable that financial structure is? Of course you can't - you think there's an unlimited amount of money and that economic collapse is virtually impossible, despite your inability to articulate why.

"The surpluses are the exact amount of payroll taxes taken in over the amount of benefits paid out. Are you disputing even this? It was set up this way by Reagan and Greenspan."

Hell yes I'm disputing this. Since you don't see any problem whatsoever with the government borrowing from itself to finance itself (that's fucking twighlight zone stuff dude), when the total public debt has never once gone back, there is no surplus.

"Actually the trust fund lends it to the treasury by buying bonds from it, who pays the trust fund back with interest. So if the net effect is zero, what's the prob? The gov would just borrow it from somewhere else..."

Wow, just wow. Such a glaring display of ignorance and stupidity in one post. I'll wait and see if you ever answer any other question asked of you, or address any of the other points you've conveniently ignored so far.

Why? Because this is fucking weapons grade stupidity right here garage.

Your bald-faced stupid argument notwithstanding, look up at the paragraph of yours I modified - can you wrap your mind around how unsustainable that financial structure is? Of course you can't - you think there's an unlimited amount of money and that economic collapse is virtually impossible, despite your inability to articulate why.

My bald faced stupid argument is working pretty well, and has been working pretty well since 1935. Honestly Gmay I don't what your big fear of the government holding this money is. What other institution can even run this? Treasury bonds historically have had the highest credit ratings and are considered one of the safest assets in the world. Of course it won't be solvent forever, it will certainly need to be tweaked, as it has successfully already.

It all starts off so seemingly benevolent & charitable (especially to the recipients), then you need to sprinkle in a little nutszoid here & there to tweak the machine along, then more & more of that. Before you know it, highly educated scientists are creating awesome killing machines (gas chambers) or others (educated in France) decide to kill anyone w/ glasses. What nutty things will we come to accept? Who knows. We've already accepted much more than we should have - we are more pliant than I thought. But I doubt our masters are as sane as we hope.

And everyone wondered why gun and ammunition sales went through the roof when Obama appointed a bunch of people who still think Mao is to be admired.

This is why everyone comes up with conspiracy theories to explain Obama... he is a foreigner, he is a Muslim. No, he is just a run of the mill idiot who has been miseducated by the left. He just lacked the native intelligence and good sense to ignore the propaganda like most people do. Just like George Mahal doesn't understand that a treasury note is a liability and not and asset so too Obama understands nothing about the US, its history or its foundational documents. The only way someone like Anita Dunn can dare to utter praise for the monster that was Mao is for the education she received to have been indistinquishable from fantasy.

Obama lives in a world that never existed and never will. To understand what he does you would have to live in the same fantasy land that he does.

I was taught that this guy did what he did for the greater good, and for a world of social equality, without the cruel exploitation of capitalism. The idea just got corrupted by bad people along the way and things got a little out of hand. You mean, that's not what happened? My teachers were...lying to me?